Character Creation Q&A

[Roughtrade]

And another thought that came while I was driving to work.

 

Would you be adverse to opening up races later?  As an example, one of the Kuru people learning later in the game that they are actually an Undine.  Taking on those traits/racial qualities when the game is already in progress.

[Roughtrade]

Trying to keep these all as separate thoughts.

Has magice (arcane and divine) always been gone from this world?  Were there legends of it?  Did it vanish within living memory?  Do people know why it stopped working?  And are you (as it seems to be indicating) going to allow multi-classing into magic classes as the game progresses?

 

[Eborne1]

3 hours ago, Roughtrade said:

Funny you should mention that…

 

I was considering a brawler.  How would you feel about allowing a character to transubstatiate into it after multiclassing as fighter and monk?  
 

Not committing to the idea.  Swashbuckling with no memory seems fun.  Just running some ideas around in my head.

All good thoughts and questions... 
The game is highly experimental with ideas I've long been building on.  I'm going to write a small summary of my plans for it, as I have come to realize that the premise is perhaps too vague for some people's liking.  In short, I've begun things as simply and vaguely as possible to create a sense of contrast with the information and diversity to come.  Expanded character options will begin opening up almost immediately upon gameplay.  Re: "transubstantiation"...  I think this will be fine.  I'm very much less concerned with character mechanics rules within the framework I've made, than I am with soft character development and narrative. 
I will open up Brawler as an option and make an announcement.  I think it's early enough to make such changes without upsetting anyone too much.        

22 minutes ago, Roughtrade said:

Not sure what that has to do with Unchained.  

The Unchained rules seemed more about refining the classes within their own specialties.  Unchained Rogues are not more fighty.  They are better at being Rogues.  With your allowance of the Elephant in the Room means the Finesse Feat that Unchained gives becomes a moot point.  EitR makes that available to all classes.  So what the Unchained Rogue gets that you are disallowing is Debilitating Injury and Rogue's Edge.  Taking away an option to do things other than lethal damage and their skill focus.  Neither of which is particularly fighter oriented.  

All fair points, especially considering the EITR.  In my experience, it has seemed that people put too much emphasis on DPS when making any character.  In the case of the U.C. Monk, especially, I feel a beautifully viable character with something unique to offer the party both in and out of combat, as well as possibly one of the most versatile characters, is forsaken in the case of the UC Monk for little more than the ability to punch harder.  I'll allow the UC Rogue.      

20 minutes ago, Roughtrade said:

And another thought that came while I was driving to work.

 

Would you be adverse to opening up races later?  As an example, one of the Kuru people learning later in the game that they are actually an Undine.  Taking on those traits/racial qualities when the game is already in progress.

There are a set number of races in Trellunnd, all of which have there own unique origin stories.  I intentionally made most of them unplayable for certain 'in-game' political reasons, but also due to a theory I have about creating fantasy contrast that affords greater awe for players/audience.  It basically goes that if you throw a rather mundane, non-magical human fighter into a high fantasy world, it creates a certain perspective that perhaps would be missing if all the characters were also super fantastical themselves.  Of course, I can't expect everyone to agree with me on that... but, for this game, I would like to stick with the races I've listed.  If something unsusual happens to a character or the party that warrants some form of permanent transmutation into another race or the adding of a template etc... I will consider that at that time.        

17 minutes ago, Roughtrade said:

Trying to keep these all as separate thoughts.

Has magice (arcane and divine) always been gone from this world?  Were there legends of it?  Did it vanish within living memory?  Do people know why it stopped working?  And are you (as it seems to be indicating) going to allow multi-classing into magic classes as the game progresses?

 

All beautiful and intriguing and magnificent questions for your character to inquire about at the first chance they get.  🙂 
I'll just say that Trellunnd's history is deep and rich.  Many things have been lost and forgotten  Many things await rediscovery.  Some things refuse to wait. 😉   
    

[Harding]

It is okay to make an Asian character or it will be misplaced?

Edited April 27, 2023 by Harding (see edit history)

[Eborne1]

17 minutes ago, Harding said:

It is okay to make an Asian character or it will be misplaced?

That's totally viable.  There's not an Asian-themed civilization per se, but Humans in Trellunnd are wide-ranging in skin color and general appearance, even though they mostly all just live together.  As the game is partly intended to help me create content and detail for the world..., Once you have a better understanding of Trellunnd's general geography and history etc..., I would let you create a small civilization and history from which your character's people originated, that might account for their appearance and culture, if you wished to do so at that time.     

Edited April 27, 2023 by Eborne1 (see edit history)

[Harding]

Thank yoi for answering my question

[Vedast]

Working on character sheet for a ranger(archer) character application.  

How distinct do you make the various bows vis-a-vis Weapon Focus?  That is, is a composite short bow distinct from a short bow etc. from the point of view of this feat applying?

Would Weapon Focus "stack" with Deadly Aim? That is, would the +1 attack bonus from WF effectively cancel the -1 to attack to gain +2 damage from DA?

Any other modifications to the Ranger's Archery combat style bonus feat selections from the Elephant in the Room that one might need to know?

Although the character would primarily be a ranged combatant, I would like to make their melee weapon some sort of pole-arm (understanding that, at the moment, they have no equipment at all).  That being said, the "Elephant" essay buffing Dodge (to gain the benefits of Mobility as well) might mitigate the effectiveness of a reach weapon (that is, by reducing battlefield control of the reach weapon by buffing a defense against an AoO).  Any GM advice here?  I've never played using the "Elephant in the Room" mods.  

 

Thank you -- quite a few questions, I understand. 

 

Edited May 2, 2023 by Vedast (see edit history)

[Eborne1]

No problem!  Ask ALL the questions.

15 minutes ago, Vedast said:

How distinct do you make the various bows vis-a-vis Weapon Focus?  That is, is a composite short bow distinct from a short bow etc. from the point of view of this feat applying?

Would Weapon Focus "stack" with Deadly Aim? That is, would the +1 attack bonus from WF effectively cancel the -1 to attack to gain +2 damage from DA?

-->Weapon Focus applies to a "type" of weapon.  So in the case of bows, it will apply to ALL bows.  I'm not sure if this is RAI, but it is how I will rule it for this game.
-->Weapon Focus is separate from and stackable with Deadly Aim  (So yes... Weapon Focus effectively cancels out the penalty of Deadly Aim until BAB = +4)     

 

15 minutes ago, Vedast said:

Any other modifications to the Ranger's Archery combat style bonus feat selections from the Elephant in the Room that one might need to know?

'Point Blank Shot' is gone and Deadly Aim is free...  (Other than those, nothing I can think of.)

  

16 minutes ago, Vedast said:

That being said, the "Elephant" essay buffing Dodge (to gain the benefits of Mobility as well) might mitigate the effectiveness of a reach weapon (that is, by reducing battlefield control of the reach weapon by buffing a defense against an AoO).  Any GM advice here?

Mobility is certainly a good defense against AoOs, but not all creatures will have Dodge/Mobility.  Also, reach weapons are very viable otherwise.  I don't think you can go too wrong, especially if it's your secondary weapon.  My personal advice (others may disagree) is to go with however you most envision the character to be, with less concern for the specific mechanics. 

Also, until you invest in magical weapons, they might experiment with a few options before deciding they favor one thing over another too.              

[Vedast]

8 minutes ago, Eborne1 said:

No problem!  Ask ALL the questions.

-->Weapon Focus applies to a "type" of weapon.  So in the case of bows, it will apply to ALL bows.  I'm not sure if this is RAI, but it is how I will rule it for this game.
-->Weapon Focus is separate from and stackable with Deadly Aim  (So yes... Weapon Focus effectively cancels out the penalty of Deadly Aim until BAB = +4)     

 

'Point Blank Shot' is gone and Deadly Aim is free...  (Other than those, nothing I can think of.)

  

Mobility is certainly a good defense against AoOs, but not all creatures will have Dodge/Mobility.  Also, reach weapons are very viable otherwise.  I don't think you can go too wrong, especially if it's your secondary weapon.  My personal advice (others may disagree) is to go with however you most envision the character to be, with less concern for the specific mechanics. 

Also, until you invest in magical weapons, they might experiment with a few options before deciding they favor one thing over another too.              

Check.  Check.  

Just to clarify, by "free" you mean that the feat can be selected by any character, any time a non-specified feat can be chosen?

Re: polearm, that's more-or-less what I was thinking.  Between Deadly Aim and a Reach weapon, the character can be an effective "support" combatant even whilst they (mostly) stay out of range given their lack of heavy armor.  I know that might sound 'mechanical' in focus, but it really is part of the roleplay concept I'd want to bring to the character.  Would, of course, need a dagger or such for a side-arm.  

Thank you.

 

[Jagael]

Free free.  Elephant in the room turns power attack and deadly aim into regular combat options for all characters with a +1 BAB.

[Eborne1]

"Free" in this instance just means that you can either add the feat to your list of feats at the beginning of the game or not, but anyone with +1 BAB (thankyou @Jagael ) can enact the normal benefits of the feat at any time.   So anyone can take a -1 to hit at any time for a +2 to damage.  The same goes for Power Attack with melee weapons.  Same goes for Combat Expertise...

ALSO, per the EITR rules Weapon Focus actually applies to a whole weapon group... and not just a type of weapon.  (I'd forgotten)  So not just bows, but all ranged weapons. 

Re: Polearms: Hitting things that can't hit you is nice. 

Always have a dagger, (or two), I say.  Also, slings and stones are free.         

Edited May 2, 2023 by Eborne1 (see edit history)

[Brian Skies]

Regarding this Weapon Focus targeting groups of weapons, what group would a rapier fall under and what other weapons would fall into that group?

[spitfire6006006]

Light blades, weapon groups are based on the fighter feature https://aonprd.com/FighterWeapons.aspx

[Eborne1]

11 minutes ago, spitfire6006006 said:

Light blades, weapon groups are based on the fighter feature https://aonprd.com/FighterWeapons.aspx

@Brian Skies This... 

Edited May 2, 2023 by Eborne1 (see edit history)

[Brian Skies]

Thank you.